In his monthly WiLL column, Ryusho Kadota argued that the Chinese authorities were not primarily attempting to conceal the existence of the Wuhan outbreak itself.
Rather, they sought to conceal the human-to-human transmission already known at an early stage and to divert attention from virus samples held at research and experimental facilities.
By examining the punishment of Dr. Li Wenliang and Dr. Ai Fen, CCTV’s repeated images of the seafood market, and the National Health Commission’s orders to destroy or transfer virus samples, Kadota sought to identify the essential nature of China’s information concealment.

July 21, 2020
This chapter was originally published on July 21, 2020.
It introduced Ryusho Kadota’s regular column entitled “Why Did China Conceal Human-to-Human Transmission?” published in the monthly magazine WiLL.
Kadota argued that the Chinese authorities did not attempt to conceal the existence of the new pneumonia completely.
Instead, they sought to prevent the world from focusing on two matters: the human-to-human transmission that they allegedly already understood at an early stage, and virus samples held at research and testing institutions in Wuhan.
The column described how Dr. Li Wenliang and Dr. Ai Fen of Wuhan Central Hospital shared information about a mysterious pneumonia with fellow doctors on December 30, 2019, and were subsequently summoned and disciplined by public security authorities or the Communist Party’s disciplinary organization within the hospital.
At the same time, China Central Television reported the doctors’ alleged “illegal conduct” on January 3, 2020, while informing the entire country of the pneumonia and repeatedly broadcasting images of the Wuhan seafood wholesale market.
This reporting created the strong impression that the market was the source of the outbreak.
On the same day, China’s National Health Commission reportedly ordered the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and other institutions to destroy virus samples or transfer them to authorized organizations.
Kadota argued that the central purpose of the concealment was to disclose the existence of the pneumonia while preventing attention from being directed toward human-to-human transmission and the existence of virus samples.
The following is a faithful English translation of the Japanese text published on July 21, 2020.

July 21, 2020
If attention were directed toward the possibility that the virus had leaked from a place where it was being experimentally handled or studied, China would face far greater risks in compensation and other matters than in the case of a “natural outbreak,” while also being subjected to questions such as whether it had been a biological weapon.
The following is from Ryusho Kadota’s regular column entitled “Why Did China Conceal Human-to-Human Transmission?” published in today’s issue of the monthly magazine WiLL.
What was China actually concealing?
Many Japanese people believe that China was hiding the outbreak of the Wuhan pneumonia itself.
But that is not the case.
I want as many people as possible to understand what China was trying to conceal and from what it was attempting to divert attention.
On July 10, new testimony was introduced on the American television network Fox News.
A Chinese infectious-disease specialist who had traveled to the United States testified that human-to-human transmission had occurred during the early stage of the novel coronavirus outbreak, but that the Chinese authorities had concealed it.
The witness was Dr. Yan Limeng, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Hong Kong’s School of Public Health.
She said:
“By December 31, the Chinese authorities already knew that human-to-human transmission was occurring.
Moreover, the infection was extremely serious.
However, the authorities did not permit anyone to disclose this information.”
I thought, “At last, the truth is beginning to be reported.”
I described the circumstances surrounding this matter in detail in my book Epidemic 2020, published in June.
However, many misunderstandings remain, so I would like to explain the matter again.
It was on December 30 of the previous year that two doctors at Wuhan Central Hospital, Li Wenliang and Ai Fen, posted information in a chat group in order to share news of the mysterious pneumonia with their fellow doctors.
It was only natural for those on the medical front line to share information in order to protect themselves from infection by patients.
However, because of this, Dr. Li Wenliang was summoned by the Wuchang Branch of the Wuhan Municipal Public Security Bureau, while Dr. Ai Fen was summoned by the Communist Party Discipline Inspection Commission within the hospital.
Both were subjected to severe criticism.
“In accordance with the law, we warn you concerning your illegal act of publishing statements on the internet that are contrary to the facts.”
Li was given a formal admonition, while Ai was subjected to a reprimand.
This is often interpreted as an attempt to conceal the existence of the mysterious pneumonia itself.
However, on January 3 of that year, the very day on which Dr. Li received the admonition, CCTV—China Central Television—immediately broadcast the matter nationwide.
Although it did not disclose Dr. Li’s name, it reported the doctors’ “illegal conduct” and simultaneously informed the entire population that pneumonia had appeared.
The news report repeatedly showed images of the Wuhan seafood wholesale market, strongly impressing upon viewers that this was the “source of the outbreak.”
What did this signify?
A clue lies in the fact that, on the day of the broadcast, China’s National Health Commission ordered the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and other institutions in Wuhan to “destroy or transfer” their virus samples.
China’s news website Caixin later exposed the order.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo responded and subsequently used it as the basis for severe criticism at press conferences.
If the National Health Commission ordered the “destruction” and “transfer” of virus samples, this means that China wanted to conceal the very existence of those samples.
In response to Pompeo’s criticism, the National Health Commission itself stated at a press conference:
“It is true that we issued a related document on January 3.
However, this was intended to prevent secondary disasters caused by an unidentified pathogen.
We believed that facilities which did not satisfy the necessary conditions for preserving the samples should either destroy them on site or transfer them to a specialized organization.”
This explanation touches the heart of the matter.
It amounted to an admission by the authorities that virus samples already “existed” at that point and that certain measures had been ordered to prevent a secondary disaster.
The authorities had concentrated the following actions by January 3: summoning and punishing doctors at Wuhan Central Hospital, including Li Wenliang and Ai Fen; broadcasting the CCTV report; and issuing the National Health Commission’s order to destroy or transfer virus samples.
As later became clear, bats and other presumed hosts of coronaviruses were not being sold at the Wuhan seafood market.
Nevertheless, through CCTV, the authorities succeeded in creating the impression that the market was the source of the infection.
If attention were directed toward the possibility that the virus had leaked from a place where it was being experimentally handled or studied, China would face far greater risks in compensation and other matters than in the case of a “natural outbreak.”
It would also be subjected to unwelcome investigation into such questions as whether the virus had been a biological weapon.
Furthermore, if human-to-human transmission became clear, it was inevitable that a major international response would follow, including WHO personnel entering China in order to prevent further expansion.
The authorities must have wished to avoid such a major development before they had taken sufficient measures.
The authorities then completed their concealment operation.
There is no need to repeat the enormous price that resulted.
On July 13, the number of infected people worldwide finally exceeded thirteen million, while the number of deaths reached 560,000.
There was still no sign that the outbreak was subsiding.
For the sake of those who died while suppressing their feelings of bitter regret, the essential nature of China’s crime must be thoroughly investigated.